Underground geological storage

Malcolm Wilson (Canada)

Energy INet (www.energyinet.com)

Joint SBSTA/IPCC side-event

COP11, Montreal, November 29th

Technology and potential

• Geological storage capacity likely to be at least 2,000 GtCO2, mainly in oil and gas fields, and in formations bearing saline water

• Upper limit uncertain; especially in saline formations

• Specific site characteristics need closer investigation

– site characterization methods are not yet broadly deployed

• CO2 injection and reservoir engineering technology for depleted oil & gas fields and saline formations is mature and available

• Monitoring of subsurface movement of CO2 is being successfully conducted at several sites

Technology maturity

XEnhanced Coal Bed Methane recovery

XSaline formations

X1Enhanced Oil Recovery

XOil and gas fields

Mature market

Economically feasible under

specific conditions

Demon-stration

ResearchCapture option

1Economically feasible under specific conditions if used for CO2 storage

Figure 5.1. Location of sites where activities relevant to CO2 storage are planned or underway

Some current storage projects

Saline formation

1,6001772004United StatesFrio

EGR8,000,000100 2004NetherlandsK12B

Saline formation

20,000,0003,0001996NorwaySleipner

Gas field17,000,0003,000 - 4,0002004AlgeriaIn Salah

EOR20,000,0003,000 - 5,0002000CanadaWeyburn

Reservoir type

Total planned storage

Daily injection (tCO2/day)

Injection start

CountryProject name

Storage prospectivity

Storage prospectivityHighly prospective sedimentarybasinsProspective sedimentary basins

Non-prospective sedimentarybasins, metamorphic and igneous rock

Data quality and availability vary among regions

Prospective areas in sedimentary basins where suitable saline formations, oil or gas fields, or coal beds may be found. Locations for storage in coal beds are only partly included. Prospectivity is a qualitative assessment of the likelihood that a suitable storage location is present in a given area based on the available information. This figure should be taken as a guide only, because it is based on partial data, the quality of which may vary from region to region, and which may change over time and with new information (Courtesy of Geoscience Australia).

Figure 5.3. Options for storing CO2 in deep underground geological formations (after Cook, 1999)

Figure 5.9. Storage security depends on a combination of physical and geochemical trapping. Over time, residual CO2 trapping, solubility

trapping and mineral trapping increase.

Design of a well

Monitoring technologies

• Time lapse seismic

• Remote sensing

– Techniques for measuring ground heave

– Remote surface gas analysis

• Geochemical monitoring

– Subsurface geochemistry

– Surface and near surface geochemistry

• Non-seismic geophysical techniques

– Electromagnetic surveys

– Gravity techniques

• Vegetational surveys (hyperspectral imagery etc)